Page 1 of 1
PPC vs. PCC
Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 7:52 pm
by Doc
Okay, right up front I'll start by saying I do know the difference. But I do have a dumb question. For a commercial operation requiring two crew, on an aircraft that requires an endorsement due to the "high performance" nature of the aircraft, (eg. Be20, SW2, or 3, Be90F etc.) and not the gross take off weight (ie. over 12,500 lbs, eg. the Be1900, DC-8, etc.) is a PPC required, or can a company get by with a PCC? In other words, can the company use an non type rated(I don't think you can get a type rating in a commercial operation without a PPC?) co-pilot? My gut reaction is....no. Anybody?
Re: PPC vs. PCC
Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 7:54 pm
by Phlyer
My first thought was PPC required, but I reread your post and I'm not sure. The over 12,500 is a for sure but what qualifies as 'high performance'? I think the qualification is the gross weight, and if it's over 12,500 the answer is yes, below, no.
Any other nerds care to comment?
Re: PPC vs. PCC
Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 8:19 pm
by victory_aviation
A high performance aeroplane has a minimum flight crew of one and a Vne of 250 kts or greater or a Vso of 80 kts or greater.
I think that you can have a PCC and be the FO on a high performance aircraft that only requires 1 pilot but this may have changed. I know that the company I work for requires a PPC for all new FO's on the BE20.
Re: PPC vs. PCC
Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:58 am
by just curious
The application for endorsement on a type-rating required aircraft, requires a flight test. This generates the Pilot Proficiency Check.
Don't make me think in the early AM anymore. That's not nice.
Re: PPC vs. PCC
Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 12:19 pm
by Cap'n P8
I think you would need the PPC initially to get the type rating. But all recurrent training could be to PCC standards. Of course if the pilot has to renew their IFR at the same time you're probably better off continually PPC'ing the crew member.
Re: PPC vs. PCC
Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:03 pm
by HuD 91gt
I flew a BE20 from the right seat with only a PCC. The company is still doing this, and has been doing so for many years prior. I have always wondered this though.
Re: PPC vs. PCC
Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 6:29 pm
by Cat Driver
Wow, I shudder to think how dangerous we must have been back when there was no PPC or PCC.
How did we survive without having been trained to those standards?
Just lucky I guess, or did the chief pilots actually have the skills and knowledge to train us and approve us to fly those airplanes?
Re: PPC vs. PCC
Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 9:14 am
by I Я Instructor
Don't you get PPC'd every 2 years and PCC'd the years in between?
Re: PPC vs. PCC
Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:13 am
by Oleo 4
Here is the bare bones 703 regs:
Flight Crew Member Qualifications
703.88 (1) Subject to subsections (6) and (7), no air operator shall permit a person to act and no person shall act as a flight crew member in an aircraft unless the person
(amended 2000/02/01; previous version)
(a) holds the licence and ratings required by Part IV;
(b) within the previous 90 days, has completed at least three take-offs and three landings
(i) where a type rating for that aircraft is required, in an aircraft of that type, or in a flight simulator representing that type of aircraft that has been approved by the Minister under Subpart 6 of Part VI for take-off and landing qualifications, or
(ii) where a type rating for that aircraft is not required, in an aircraft of that category and class, or in a flight simulator representing that category and class of aircraft that has been approved by the Minister under Subpart 6 of Part VI for take-off and landing qualifications;
(c) has successfully completed a pilot proficiency check or competency check for that type of aircraft, the validity period of which has not expired, in accordance with the Commercial Air Service Standards as follows:
(amended 2000/02/01; previous version)
(i) in the case of the pilot-in-command of a multi-engined aircraft or of a single-engined aeroplane that is operated in accordance with subsection 703.22(2), a pilot proficiency check for that type of aircraft,
(ii) in the case of the pilot-in-command of a single-engined helicopter, a pilot proficiency check on one of the types of single-engined helicopters operated by the air operator,
(iii) in the case of the second-in-command of a multi-engined aircraft, a pilot proficiency check or a competency check for that type of aircraft, and
(iv) in the case of the pilot-in-command of a single-engined aeroplane that is not operated in accordance with subsection 703.22(2), a competency check for that type of aircraft; and
(amended 1999/06/01; previous version)
(d) has fulfilled the requirements of the air operator's ground and flight training program.
My understanding was mulit/ifr pic was ppc'd while each company has its own ops manual certified in relation to the co-joes being ppc'd, pcc'd, or just being a swamper because the plane is listed by TC of only requiring a crew of 1 such as most beech king airs.
Re: PPC vs. PCC
Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:16 am
by chu me
Cat;
Apparently you guys were so dangerous that T.C. decided to make it law that we would have to train to these standards. Now thanks to your crappy ass flying I have to do a fucking PPC every two years!!!
Sincerely
Chu me
Re: PPC vs. PCC
Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 9:37 pm
by tired of the ground
Initial must be a PPC for the issuance of a type rating. Recurrent may be a pcc as the type rating stays forever
Re: PPC vs. PCC
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2008 7:59 am
by MacTarmac
i dont think that an initial type rating has anything to do with a ppc.
think about 604 ops , where you simply train to proficiency and recieve an initial type rating based on that.
you are right that the type rating never leaves even if you transfer it into commercial ops.
however it is at that point that you require a ppc or pcc as a second in command (703 0ps).
i agree with oleo and think you should be able to get away with a pcc for second in command depending on what has been aproved by TC in your ops manual. That is only if it is indeed operated under 703. having never flown one i assume it is. But can it also be opperated 704? based on # of Pax? Then read the rules for 704. ( i dont rmember what they say but ill bet you need a ppc)
if the aircraft requires a type rating you need it to act as a crew member.
( unlike in FAA rules where sic does not require a type rating)
not to get this thread of topic but:
i have a different question that i have talked about with guys:
and that is this idea of "12500" . where in the CARS do you find it says over 12500 requires 2 crew and or a type rating? everyone talks about 12500.
i understand the 2 crew or type rating required as weather or not TC , or the manufacturuer says the aircraft requires it.
i understand that the rules of commercial ops change with the size or capability of the aircraft ie:703,704,705 differences. but i fail to read the 12500 number in there.
i must admit it has been a while since i read the cars but i was curious on this number.
12500, i think is a certification standards thing ie: under 12500 lbs has a less stringent certification process or less data to generate for certification of type.
i dont see how 12500 makes a difference on opperating requirements for us.
anybody care to enlighten me please ,
Thanks
Re: PPC vs. PCC
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2008 9:25 am
by just curious
While I can't speak for the others, in the olden days, anything over 12500 was big, anything under was little. Little planes little rules. Pretty easy. Now, it's fuzzy. Over 9 seats medium. Over 19, big.
We PPC all our FO's at our place. Gives the company a second, sober look at a candidate. Kinda makes me feel like a senator.
Re: PPC vs. PCC
Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2008 10:02 am
by Hedley
You play hockey that badly?
Re: PPC vs. PCC
Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 2:53 pm
by bbb
Type ratings can be signed off by other than TC or Approved check pilots. There are some aircraft that you need a type rating to fly, hence even to act as SIC, you must have the type rating, and being the aircraft is used in 703 flying, must also have completed the approved company training, which could include either a PPC (PIC or SIC versions) or a PCC (valid only for SIC). The one I have is also authorized as a single-pilot machine (by type certificate), weighs 12,500lbs, can seat up to 9 or 11 passengers (been too long, can't remember) but is high performance, hence the type rating requirement.
Check out the requirements for Type rating applications, and who is authorized to sign off the training and application.
It was much simpler with CP's signing off candidates, and 1 test good for many of similar aircraft. Too bad too many people didn't do their due diligence and make sure the people they were sending out were trained. Not saying that now that TC says need "x" hours guarantees anything better, but TC's immediate knee-jerk reaction is to regulate, regulate, regulate. If we keep giving them excuses, they just find more ways to do it.
Can you tell I have to entertain the idiots for their new and improved "Program Validation" (previously called - audit, safety inspection, compliance inspection, etc). And do you know that we now have to submit to them ahead of time basically their own inspection?